Zillow asks court to toss RESPA case for good 

Zillow has asked a judge to dismiss a third amended complaint in the Taylor/Armstrong case, a lawsuit in which the company was accused of violating the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) by steering customers to Zillow Home Loans (ZHL).

In its 33-page motion filed Sept. 21 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Zillow alleged that the plaintiffs have continued to state claims that the court previously rejected.

"By pleading even fewer facts than before, Plaintiffs have shown they are incapable of curing the deficiencies in their claims. They have had several bites at this apple, and still fail to state a claim," Zillow's filing said, adding that the third amended class-action complaint "should be dismissed with prejudice."

How we got here: The case, which was initially filed in September 2025, alleged that the portal giant inflated costs for homebuyers through its Zillow Flex referral program. Allegations that customers were steered to Zillow Home Loans were later added, and the case was merged with another class-action suit in December 2025.

Judge James Robart dismissed the consolidated case in July. But Robart gave the plaintiffs an opportunity to file an amended complaint, stating that the court could not "conclude the Plaintiffs are entirely incapable of curing" the "defects" contained within their earlier filings.

The plaintiffs did file another amended complaint last month that focused on alleged RESPA and Washington state Consumer Protection Act violations. The latest amended complaint also added more specific details, including dollar amounts for settlement services like loan origination fees.

Why Zillow says the case should be tossed: Zillow's Sept. 21 filing urged the court to dismiss the complaint with prejudice, which would prevent the case from being refiled at a later date.

In its motion to dismiss, Zillow said the plaintiffs had in their amended complaint "ignore(d) the Court's instruction to identify how much they paid for a ZHL pre-approval letter because they in fact paid nothing."

"Rather than address the Order, the (third amended complaint) strips out many of the specific factual allegations related to pre-approval letter metrics the Court found deficient and replaces them with vague allegations of an undefined agreement to 'steer' buyers to ZHL, generally," the filing alleged.

Zillow has also maintained that its model gives consumers more information and that they can choose how they use the tools without being required to get financing through ZHL.